[1] The condition required for the so-called "land which is surrounded by another person's land" to constitute a "vegetable site where the construction of a house is prohibited by the Building Act" under Article 20 (1) 3 of the Act on the Ownership of Housing Site

[2] In a case where the land adjacent to a road among the land surrounding a site is owned by the owner of a site, the condition that the land falls under the category of "B site where the construction of a house is prohibited by the Building Act" under Article 20 (1) 3 of the Building Act

[1] Where a building is to be constructed on a site within an urban planning zone, the site must adjoin to a road more than 2 meters. Unless it does so, a site should adjoin to a road, such as a plaza, park, amusement park, etc., or a site above the standard width of a road under the Building Act should be secured by securing the part of land above the standard width of a road under the Building Act so that a road can be designated under Article 2 subparagraph 11 (b) of the Building Act. Thus, a site adjoining to a road which is surrounded by all other land should not be considered as a "one site" unless it satisfies the above conditions of a road adjacent to a road or acquires ownership, etc. of an adjacent site meeting the conditions of a road adjacent to a road, and thus, a building permit cannot be obtained or a building report cannot be filed, and such site constitutes a "Bed site prohibited from constructing a house by the Building Act" under the former part of Article 20 (1) 3 of the Building Act, and even if it does not meet the conditions on the site adjacent to a road, it does not constitute a prohibited site.

[2] If the land adjacent to a road among the lands surrounding a site is owned by the owner of a site, and there is a space to designate roads as stipulated in Article 2, subparagraph 11 (b) of the Building Act on such land, the site does not constitute a site where construction is prohibited by meeting the conditions on the surface of the road. However, if there is no space to designate a site on such land, the site constitutes a site where construction is prohibited by failing to meet the conditions on the surface of the road, barring any special circumstances.

[1] Article 2 subparagraph 11 (b) of the Building Act, Articles 8, 9, 33, and 36 (1) of the Building Act, Article 20 (1) 3 of the Building Act, Articles 3 (4), 28, and 30 (1) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Building Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 14891 of Dec. 30, 1995) / [2] Articles 2 subparagraph 11 (b), 33, and 36 (1) of the Building Act, Article 20 (1) 3 of the Building Act, Article 3 (4), 28, and 30 (1) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Building Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 14891 of Dec. 30, 1995)

[1] [2] Supreme Court Decision 94Nu9795 delivered on December 27, 1994 (Gong1995Sang, 705), Supreme Court Decision 93Nu20498 delivered on February 25, 1994 (Gong1994Sang, 1132), Supreme Court Decision 95Nu18680 delivered on March 8, 1996 (Gong196Sang, 1283), Supreme Court Decision 96Nu2750, 2828 delivered on July 9, 196 (Gong196Ha, 2506)

The Korean Foundation for the Maintenance of the Korean Foundation's Domina Dominium (Attorney Choi Ba-sik et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellant)

The head of Yangcheon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government

Seoul High Court Decision 96Gu18573 delivered on June 24, 1997

The appeal is dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

In full view of the provisions of Articles 2 subparag. 11, 8, 9, and 33 of the Building Act and Articles 3(4), 28, and 30(1) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Building Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 14891 of Dec. 30, 195), if a building is to be constructed on a site within an urban planning zone, the site shall adjoin to a road not less than 2 meters; if a building is to be installed on a site; if a building is to have an open site such as a plaza, park, amusement park, or amusement park, etc.; or if a building is to be designated on a site (hereinafter referred to as a “location”) as provided in subparagraph 11(b) of Article 2 subparag. 9 of the Building Act with the consent of interested parties so that it does not meet the necessary standard size of the building, and thus, if the site adjoining to a road is not owned by the owner, it shall not be deemed that the building owner meets the above conditions or is not subject to 97.

The court below acknowledged the fact that the site of this case owned by the plaintiff within the urban planning zone does not adjoin roads surrounded by other land, and there exists a religious site in the judgment of the court below holding that there is a house and church building among the surrounding land, and there is a passage of 17 meters away from the length for the site of this case, but the width is not less than 1.2m to 1.5m, and even if the wall installed between the passage and the church building is removed, the space width between the outer wall of the church building and the wall is less than 0.5m to 0.7m, and thus, even if the wall installed between the passage and the church building, the space width between the outer wall of the church building and the wall is less than 0.5m to 0.7m as provided in Article 3 (4) 2 of the Enforcement Decree of the Building Act on the above religious site, the court below did not accept the construction line of this case as a site adjacent to the above religious site, and it does not meet the standard for the ground of appeal.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Justices Lee Don-hee (Presiding Justice)